The Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums
Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1
Please read this thread...
Software update
Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > >
Forum Username

Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Wooden Line

Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Courtesy Quick Links


Links Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in the quest for knowledge and support:

Jennifer Kirley's
Conway Business Services


Howard's
International Quality Services


Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting, and
Medical Devices Expert Forum


Bob Doering
Bob Doering's Blogs and,
Correct SPC - Precision Machining


Ajit Basrur
Claritas Consulting, LLC



International Standards Bodies - World Wide Standards Bodies

AIAG - Automotive Industry Action Group

ASQ - American Society for Quality

International Organization for Standardization - ISO Standards and Information

NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology


Some Related Topic Tags
5.5.1 - responsibility and authority, contractors (goods and services providers), iso 9001 - quality management systems, responsibilities
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  Post Number #1  
Old 29th February 2008, 01:34 PM
Ted Schmitt's Avatar
Ted Schmitt

 
 
Total Posts: 668
Question Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

How do you guys define and communicate the responsibility and authority within your organizations?

I used to have a table in my Quality Manual which listed the clauses and which positions where responsible for each. During our recent surveillance audit, the auditor suggested that I include this in my process map of each process which I thought was a good idea... what are your opinions?

Sponsored Links
  Post Number #2  
Old 29th February 2008, 02:17 PM
Stijloor's Avatar
Stijloor

 
 
Total Posts: 15,334
Re: 5.5.1 - Responsibility and Authority

Quote:
In Reply to Parent Post by tedschmitt View Post

How do you guys define and communicate the responsibility and authority within your organizations?

I used to have a table in my Quality Manual which listed the clauses and which positions where responsible for each. During our recent surveillance audit, the auditor suggested that I include this in my process map of each process which I thought was a good idea... what are your opinions?
Hello Ted,

This is wat I do:
  1. Organizational chart (titles+names) for the company's information system only. These are updated when personnel changes occur.
  2. Organizational chart in the Quality Manual (titles only).
  3. Job/function descriptions tied to the job.
  4. Procedures that list responsibilities (by title).
Works like a charm.

Stijloor.

Last edited by Stijloor; 29th February 2008 at 09:28 PM.
Thank You to Stijloor for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #3  
Old 29th February 2008, 04:45 PM
SteelMaiden's Avatar
SteelMaiden

 
 
Total Posts: 4,196
Re: Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

We have several things:
a generic listing of responsibilities in the QM
Color coded reponsibilities in the "interaction between the processes of the QMS" section of our QM.
Responsibilities defined in each procedure and work instruction.
Thanks to SteelMaiden for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #4  
Old 29th February 2008, 10:49 PM
JaneB's Avatar
JaneB

 
 
Total Posts: 3,518
Re: Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

Quote:
In Reply to Parent Post by tedschmitt View Post

I used to have a table in my Quality Manual which listed the clauses and which positions where responsible for each. During our recent surveillance audit, the auditor suggested that I include this in my process map of each process which I thought was a good idea... what are your opinions?
Would this really add any value? Sounds to me like something that would/could be a huge amount of work to create and to maintain, for fairly dubious or minimal gain.

I had an auditor once who wanted the company to add to all of its 200-300 odd online documents precisely which ISO clause each of them related to. But the benefits of same? IMO, it was because this would make their 'tick and flick' audit approach easier to do, and advised the client against it.

I can't see any benefits of this particular idea myself. But I rarely see a single role as having single responsibility for a single clause.

I most commonly use #1, #3 and #4 from Stijloor's post. I will also sometimes have a summary of overall responsibilities in the Quality Manual/Policy Manual/Call It What You Will Manual, but that depends on whether it will provide any value for the particular organisation involved.
Thanks to JaneB for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #5  
Old 1st March 2008, 10:15 AM
Jim Wynne's Avatar
Jim Wynne

 
 
Total Posts: 14,217
Re: Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

What seems to be missing in all of this (and many, if not most quality systems) is the understanding of the importance of responsibility and authority. Things go wrong all the time because people have been assigned responsibility for things they can't change due to lack of authority.

The quality manual should be the official method of delegation of authority in the QMS. It should clearly state not only who has responsibility, but who has officially been granted authority by top management. Top management should be made to understand this concept and accept it before signing off on the manual, otherwise the single most important principle (imo) in ISO 9001 has not been satisfied.
Thank You to Jim Wynne for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #6  
Old 1st March 2008, 10:45 AM
AndyN's Avatar
AndyN

 
 
Total Posts: 9,030
Thumbs up Re: Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

Quite so, Jim. An excellent point. Authority gives an extra dimension to peoples' responsibilities and without it, nothing gets done!

In terms of documentation, I think the focus should be on the process defining responsibilities. From the highest level of process description to the lower activities, the responsibilities can be defined very well. I think the idea of job descriptions and organization charts to to re-inforce silos, so making the working documents.
Thanks to AndyN for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #7  
Old 1st March 2008, 12:15 PM
Stijloor's Avatar
Stijloor

 
 
Total Posts: 15,334
Re: Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

Quote:
In Reply to Parent Post by Jim Wynne View Post

What seems to be missing in all of this (and many, if not most quality systems) is the understanding of the importance of responsibility and authority. Things go wrong all the time because people have been assigned responsibility for things they can't change due to lack of authority.

The quality manual should be the official method of delegation of authority in the QMS. It should clearly state not only who has responsibility, but who has officially been granted authority by top management. Top management should be made to understand this concept and accept it before signing off on the manual, otherwise the single most important principle (imo) in ISO 9001 has not been satisfied.
Excellent points Jim!

Responsibility can be defined. Yes, authority can be granted. Formally. But I've learned long time ago that "real" authority is determined by personalities and company politics. I am sure that many of us learned who to go see if you wanted things done. Informal.

Hence the expression: "It's not what you know, but who you know."

Stijloor.
Thanks to Stijloor for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
  Post Number #8  
Old 1st March 2008, 12:29 PM
Jim Wynne's Avatar
Jim Wynne

 
 
Total Posts: 14,217
Re: Responsibility and Authority - ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1

This is exactly the reason that ISO 9001 calls for clear definitions of authority. It's not enough to say, "That's the way it's always been." If a company hasn't defined authority clearly and decisively, and honored the official delegations, it should never be considered compliant with the standard.
Thank You to Jim Wynne for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > >

Bookmarks



Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Emoticons are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
How to meet Responsibility and Authority (Clause 5.5.1) Requirements qltyscope1 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11 23rd February 2013 09:56 AM
Responsibility and Authority Definitions (ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1) Mariep26 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5 12th May 2011 02:44 PM
ISO 9001 Clause 5.5.1 Responsibility and Authority - Application in various companies somashekar ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3 31st August 2010 02:49 AM
Interpreting Responsibility and Authority Clause 5.5.1 ISO 13485 QualitySysISOAdmin ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 12 12th April 2009 08:14 AM
Responsibility / Authority not Defined / Communicated - Clause 5.5.1 - NCR No: 4 SilverHawk General Auditing Discussions 9 7th July 2004 05:41 PM



The time now is 12:43 AM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



Misc. Internal Links


NOTE: This forum uses "Cookies"